How could I process multiple webhooks in batches?

[FelixL]

You could save your webhook data to a MySQL table and with a second workflow incrementally process the data.
The second workflow would just poll the database and whenever there is new data it loads all of them and processes them.

A nicer solution would be, to use transactions with the MySQL nodes. But afaik n8n does not support transactions at all right now.

Some feature requests about transaction support for database nodes:

Database Transactions

The idea is: To have database transactions from getting the needed that in one node, processing it and saving it in final node. There could be a node called “Start Database Transaction” and another one called “Finish Database” transaction. My use case: I currently want to fully replace the backend with n8n from now on. I think it would be beneficial to add this because: I could safely read and update data just like a real backend, and have n8n solely as backend in my projects. Are you wil…

Transactional Workflow for postgres (or other transactional databases)

Hi ! In workflow with postgres nodes (should be the same problem with other databases nodes), we update / insert / delete datas during the execution, with data manipulations, preparations or any other things. If, for any reason, the worflow execution fails on one node (lets say a node near the end of the workflow), all datas inserted / updated / delete in database before this failed node is still inserted / updated / deleted. But the worflow is not finished. We can not re-execute directly th…

MySQL add transaction nodes

The idea is: Add transaction features to the MySQL node like BEGIN (start transaction) ROLLBACK COMMIT maybe even add the ability to lock / unlock tables My use case: My use case right now is to update tables without having a few ms between deleting the table and reinserting all rows. But there will be more in depth use cases for me as soon as I create more workflows which communicate with our databases. I think it would be beneficial to add this because: To be able to roll back certain…

@MutedJam, perhaps those three feature requests should be merged?